The available records do not permit a responsible conclusion.
Plaintiffs in US Anti-Terrorism Act suits allege that MTN paid protection money to the Taliban for the security of its towers in Afghanistan.
paid protection money to the Taliban for the security of its towers
- About
- MTN Group Limited
- Claim made by
- BusinessTech, press report
- Published
- 29 September 2026
- Evidence score
- 58 How it was scored
- Last reviewed
- 25 October 2026
Why this label
The allegation comes from plaintiffs' complaints about MTN's former operations in Syria, Afghanistan and IranS2. The federal court in the Eastern District of New York let certain claims in Zobay proceed in September 2023S1 and on 25 September 2026 refused MTN's requests to reconsider or allow an immediate appealS2. At the motion to dismiss stage a court accepts the allegations as pleaded and makes no findingS2. MTN denies being a culpable participant in the attacksS2. The Zobay and Long cases now move to discovery, with summary judgment possible laterS2S6. No finding of liability exists.
Current procedural position
Motion to dismiss denied in part in Zobay on 28 September 2023S1. Reconsideration and interlocutory appeal refused on 25 September 2026, and Zobay and Long move to discoveryS2S6. No liability finding.
Record supporting the assessment
paid protection money to the Taliban for the security of its towers
will now proceed to the discovery phase
denied MTN's requests to reconsider
Conflicting or limiting record
MTN was not a culpable participant in the attacks at issue.
MTN firmly believes that the plaintiffs have sued the wrong defendants in the wrong court
Evidence score: 58 of 100
The score grades how well the record establishes this assessment. It is not a score of MTN Group Limited. Score = source authority + directness + corroboration + procedural accuracy + currency + reproducibility.
| Component | Points | Max | Reason |
|---|---|---|---|
| Source authorityIs the source competent to establish the proposition? | 14 | 30 | The allegation is from complaints relayed by press, and the denial is the company's own. |
| DirectnessDoes the source state the proposition or only discuss adjacent facts? | 15 | 20 | The report states the allegation and the denial directly. |
| CorroborationDo independent records support the same material point? | 9 | 15 | The company statement confirms the litigation, not the facts. A second named report dates the ruling. |
| Procedural accuracyDoes the record settle the procedural state the claim describes? | 3 | 15 | The cases are in discovery with no findings. |
| CurrencyHas the record been checked against later developments? | 10 | 10 | Checked against reporting from 29 September 2026. |
| ReproducibilityCan a reader locate the passage and repeat the assessment? | 7 | 10 | The press report and company statement are public, but the court orders were not read. |
| Total | 58 | 100 |
Timeline
Related cases
- Zobay et al. v. MTN Group Limited et al., with the related Long caseUS District Court for the Eastern District of New York. Civil. Not published.Stage: Discovery in Zobay and the related Long case after the ruling of 25 September 2026. The separate Cabrera and Chand cases are in the District of Columbia and had no material updatesS2S6.
Responses
- MTN Group, 29 September 2026: MTN said the rulings are procedural and that it was not a culpable participant in the attacks.S2
Revision history
- Assessment first published with label Unresolved.
Have a record that changes this assessment? See corrections and responses.
Sources
- S2Tier C United States anti-terrorism case against South Africa's MTN moving aheadBusinessTech. Press report. 29 September 2026.Staff report on the 2026 refusal of reconsideration and the move to discovery. It names no reporter and gives no order date.
- S6Tier C Two MTN antiterrorism cases move to discovery phase in the USBusiness Day. Press report. 30 September 2026.Report by Mudiwa Gavaza dating the refusal of reconsideration to 25 September and placing the Cabrera and Chand cases in the District of Columbia. It relays an MTN update, not the order.Link working, checked 25 October 2026
- S1Tier B MTN Group notes incorrect media article relating to US legal issueMTN Group. Company statement. 17 April 2025.MTN's account of the September 2023 Zobay ruling and its denial. It is a party statement, not the court order.Link working, checked 25 October 2026
Other claims about MTN Group Limited
- Unresolved56Turkcell alleges in its South African lawsuit that MTN paid bribes to South African and Iranian officials to secure its stake in Irancell.Press report, 22 May 20254 records citedBribery
- Outdated68The South African High Court found in November 2022 that South African courts did not have jurisdiction over Turkcell's claim against MTN and dismissed it with costs.Press report, 30 April 20254 records citedCorporate status
- Supported65MTN said the September 2023 US ruling did not mean it had lost the case or that it had violated the law.Company statement, 17 April 20255 records citedCorporate status